陳拔 wrote:
的確這次測完後，感覺還是用主機板自動模式下去跑就好了，全核超頻在效能／功耗比上面的確沒什麼優勢，加上目前應用程式／遊戲的狀態，用單一／二個體值比較好的核心去跑高速，就有不錯的效能了。
其實在這顆１０９００Ｋ 尚未發佈前，網路上的玩家，對這顆小火爐，心裡早就有底了。
尤其在14nm+++++++++++++++的加持下，頻率的提升，除了有限外，早己超過甜密點的電壓與頻率的
強行拉高，伴隨而來的，就是驚人的耗電量。（何時水冷，成為了建議配備呢？！）
關於以上的論點，可以從 Tom's Hardware Guide 得到證實。
最後，您的表格做的很好，最終只差 能耗表，不然大家都被分數＆禎數，所曚敝.
In a surprise to absolutely no one, the Core i9-10900K notched high power consumption measurements and poor efficiency metrics. As we can see, the stock 10900K draws nearly the same amount of power as the overclocked 9900K during the multi-threaded y-cruncher test, and exceeds its predecessor during the HandBrake workloads. We actually don't see too much of an increase in power due to overclocking, largely because the Core i9-10900K is already overclocked at its stock settings. Ryzen's stellar power consumption and efficiency, especially given their high core counts relative to competing Intel models, is impressive. That's simply the benefit of having a smaller, denser 7nm TSMC node. In terms of efficiency, it's clear that Intel's Core i9-10900K isn't nearly as efficient as any of the Ryzen 3000 series processors.
內文搜尋
從 APP 打開
X